Notice how much time President Clinton has been spending abroad? Perhaps he should have stayed there.

Fresh from his latest jaunt, this time to Chile, Clinton returned Monday night just in time to make a really stupid decision. But this time, it was not a decision regarding his personal life or pending court cases. In his infinite wisdom, our fearless leader struck another decisive blow in the war on drugs.

He decided against funding needle-exchange programs.

It's a brilliant idea, especially if you are in favor of allowing the AIDS epidemic to continue to claim millions of lives. It is, apparently, an even better idea if you are not in the habit of committing political suicide. And that would be the problem. Once again, partisan politics defeats common sense.

That really is the issue at stake here. Common sense. Common sense would dictate that a scientifically proven means of reducing the spread of HIV infection would be financed by the federal government. Nine years ago, Congress first declared no federal money could be spent to support clean-needle programs until the government provided scientific evidence that the programs did not encourage drug use. The government did just that.

Donna E. Shalala, Health and Human Services secretary, presented the evidence, which was conducted during the nine-year period through federal grant money, to the president. The research was conclusive, and Shalala's staff had devised guidelines that would mandate the manner in which the federal money would be spent.

But it was to no avail. Apparently, it matters not that an estimated 33 people contract the AIDS virus every day through intravenous drug use. And apparently, it is insignificant that U.N. AIDS research indicates that more than 30 million people are HIV positive worldwide.

An AIDS epidemic is secondary to politics and popularity ratings. Clinton administration officials and advisers feared the Republican-controlled Congress would enact legislation stripping federal money from organizations participating in clean-needle programs.

And let us not forget the most significant reason for depriving federal money to fund a necessary and valuable program - the war on drugs. This is a war we continue to wage despite the casualties and immeasurable losses. By helping addicts to save their own lives and those with whom they would be apt to share needles, the president would appear weak in his goal to ensure a drug-free America.

We have lost the war on drugs. The latest polls indicate 70 percent of Americans believe we lost the war but need to keep fighting. And I agree, but it is obvious our tactics are ineffective. Legalization is the usual extreme that is thrown out as the solution to the drug problem.

But legalization is not the only option. What seems to be the most obvious solution is a decriminalization of drugs. As we continue to punish manufacturers, dealers and users, the demand for drugs continues to increase. And as we continue to build prisons to house these criminals, the public health crisis that is drug addiction continues to flourish.

Drug addiction is not curtailed by punishment. It is helped through treatment and rehabilitation. Needle-exchange programs are not only effective in preventing the spread of HIV, but they also are offered with treatment programs. In various privately funded needle-exchange programs, statistics have indicated more than half of the participants entered the treatment program. These are results.

And these are the results that should not be ignored. Providing clean needles to addicts and funding treatment programs is expensive, but we can afford it. It is significantly cheaper than paying for years of incarceration, medical care for drug-related health problems and all the associated costs of drug abuse.

We need to move addiction and drug problems away from the police and prisons and put them in the hands of health-care professionals - where they belong.

Piscitelli, a senior journalism major, welcomes comments at ap531594.